The timing of this seems very suspicious and almost like someone may be being paid to do this. Of course that is jumping to conclusions and really need to wait and see how many are saying the same thing and if the patterns are similar. This is just the kind of thing like you said jack that his will have a devastating affect on his campaign.
Teri...bingo...you're right to flag the timing…and...right to pump the brakes on the conclusion simultaneously.
Suspicious timing is real in politics. Opposition research is a billion-dollar industry. The fact that this broke 27 days before early voting begins...is not an accident of the calendar.
But...here's the discipline that matters.
Suspicious timing...doesn't make allegations false. And... it doesn't make them true.
Corporate Media is turning into the National Inquire of rumors and propaganda. Eric Swalwell is an amazing Statesman and is, and will continue to be a decent human being. I hope he rises above all this gossip, because he would be an outstanding Governor. Thanks for getting out ahead of this story, Jack. TGIF to you and your readers and will reStack ASAP 💯👍
Karen...thank you for the reStack... genuinely appreciated!
Your frustration...with how allegations move from social media...to national coverage...with minimal vetting is legitimate. That problem is real and documented.
Here's where I'll be clear though.
The San Francisco Chronicle is not the National Enquirer. Their story includes a former staffer...contemporaneous texts...disclosures to friends and family...and medical follow-up. CNN followed with four additional women.
That doesn't make him guilty.
But...it moves this beyond rumor.
What happens next...whether the accounts are consistent...whether corroboration holds ...will tell us FAR more than any initial reporting.
Your faith in him may be entirely warranted.
But...the framework for evaluating it has to be the evidence…not the affection.
Jack, I believe that at the very least, this will destroy his gubernatorial campaign and at worst, his entire political career. I agree with others that the timing is suspect. I have no idea whether he’s guilty or not but I don’t think it matters… not for his career. If he’s innocent, I really hate this for him.
I just have one question for right now. Why didn’t allegations like this and far worse, destroy Trump’s political career? Too many rich and powerful people, institutions and governments involved?
Thank you for your insight into this. I agree with all of it.
The Dems have a habit of holding their candidates to extreme purity tests, especially in this area. Fwiw, I believe it was the impeachment of Pres Clinton that caused the Dems to have such a low tolerance level for these sorts of things. Look at Al Franken. He got pushed out of the Senate because he made inappropriate remarks/touching during his time as a comedian. There are Repubs that see these sorts of things as a badge of honor, and way too many think that intimate violence is a great way to keep their woman/women in line.
I also wonder why allegations did not destroy a particular career when such allegations have destroyed other careers. Timing and patterns are important though. Still, even when allegations have come earlier for someone, why is it that that person continued and was claimed a winner. Was it money? There are many people who refused to believe what was proven.
Minnesotan here. This reminds me so much of what happened to Al Franken. I do understand believing the women. But why is it always about the timing. He has been in office for quite a while. Why is this happening now with not much time before the CA primary. This is how you get rid of good democrats whether it is true or not.
Betsy...the Franken comparison hits this squarely on target.
He was pushed out in 72 hours. Before any investigation. Before the Ethics Committee he specifically requested could examine a single piece of evidence.
Whether that was right is still debated. What's not debatable is the result...a senior Democrat...with real institutional power…GONE in three days.
Your timing instinct is sound. Opposition research does NOT surface randomly. Twenty-seven days before early voting...in a wide-open primary...is NOT a coincidence.
But...here's the tension...that doesn't resolve cleanly.
The mechanism can be real…and the allegations can ALSO be real. Timing as a weapon doesn't require fabrication. It just requires PATIENCE.
Exactly, Betsy. Al Franken definitely came to my mind.
Still, there are women I believe should have been believed, yet appointments were approved for the accused people. One of them in particular on the Supreme Court comes to mind.
We have been longtime sustaining donors to Eric Swallwell, though he is not our Congressional Representative. We’ve been impressed by his willingness to stand up and fight, to speak out and are now SHOCKED by these accusations! The article in the San Francisco Chronicle was gutting. Thought that Swallwell was the best chance to elect a Governor akin to the “retiring” Gavin Newsom, who would stand up to this regime, to fight for and protect California. I hate to admit it but we’ve stopped that recurring donation this afternoon, changing it to Xavier Becerra instead. I will not support Steyer, who I do not feel is trustworthy, considering how he’s invested his money over the years. Porter also appears to be someone not worthy of our support. I am so shocked, angry, frustrated…and the timing for this “revelation” also seems very suspicious and convenient…Steyer possibly being the biggest beneficiary of Swallwell’s political “demise!”
PS. While writing this, and consulting my husband, we have decided to “un-cancel” our Swallwell donation, along with donating to Becerra! So glad that you’ve addressed this Jack…let’s hope it’s dirty politics, not what it currently appears to be!
If there’s a way to direct message me on this platform, could you tell me why you think Katie Porter is “unworthy?” She was my representative. Bear in mind, women are judged far more harshly & for less than men on our politics. I asked for a direct message because I don’t want to take up space here for a personal issue.
I don’t know if there is away to DM, so I am responding here. I liked Porter initially, but as time passed I was reading a number of things that made me uncomfortable with her. That’s about as deep as I am going to go, it’s my personal assessment of this candidate and nothing more.
Trump endorses former Fox News host and strong Trump supporter Steve Hilton on Monday, and then this smear story about one of Hilton's opponents breaks on Friday - less than two months before the June 2 Primary. Really?
I'm sure the fact that Trump is seeking revenge on all his perceived enemies, and the fact that Swalwell was the Ranking Member of the House Judiciary Select Subcommittee on the January 6 investigation, had absolutely nothing to do with this.
Mary Jo...you just added a data point the article didn't have.
Trump endorsed Steve Hilton on Monday.
This story broke on Friday.
That's a four-day window between a Trump endorsement of Swalwell's direct competitor…and...the publication of allegations...that immediately destabilized Swalwell's campaign.
That sequence deserves to be stated plainly...and watched CAREFULLY.
Add the January 6 dimension. Swalwell wasn't just a Trump critic...he was a ranking member on the subcommittee....that investigated the INSURRECTION.
Trump has been EXPLICIT..and PUBLIC....about his intention to settle those scores.
The DOJ under Blanche is already pursuing perceived enemies. The FBI under Kash Patel ...was reportedly pushing to release Ethics Committee files on Swalwell...earlier this year.
That's not paranoia. That's a documented PATTERN of behavior...from people who have stated their intentions openly.
Does that make the allegations false?
Not necessarily.
Does it mean the timing and the sequencing deserve serious scrutiny?
ABSOLUTELY.
The San Francisco Chronicle did not manufacture accusers. But...who surfaces information…when…and...to whom…is a separate question from whether the information is true.
I hadn’t heard of Trump’s endorsement of Hilton…but the longer I think about it, the more likely it seems to me that this is spurious! Wouldn’t discount Trump doing exactly what you suggest…he’s a vindictive and looking to hurt everyone…his “revenge & retribution tour” is what I have been referring to Trump 2.0 as….
I agree with Mary Jo’s assessment. The timing is very suspect. How long ago did these allegations occur? I wouldn’t put it past Trump to throw a wrench into this election. Anything to get his pick, Hilton, into the office. Trump complains about election rigging and does it anyways.
Sidebar: by Trump choosing Hilton could be considered by some to be a jinx vote (since the majority of Trump’s choices have lost) and may cause Bianco to get the votes instead on the GOPs side. I’m hoping cooler heads will prevail and neither Hilton or Bianco gets past the primary.
Rod...because this is exactly what happens to them.
The machinery doesn't care about good intentions. It cares about threat level. The more viable you are…the more valuable you are...as a TARGET.
Biden is the right reference point, Rod. The drip…drip…drip of the competency narrative.
Each story individually defensible. The cumulative weight…DEVASTATING.
Same structure. Different WEAPON.
Your final question...should keep every voter up at night.
We are systematically pricing good people out of public service. The cost-benefit calculation...increasingly doesn't pencil out for anyone with something real to lose.
Which means...the people most willing to run…are increasingly the people who want power badly enough...to absorb ANY cost...to get it.
True words, Jack. I saw this pattern happen, all too often, in higher education-a system that exists on politics. Good people got hurt, their families struggled to stay together, “sides” were taken and “pecking” orders were restructured. People were forced out when they were “labeled” in the same way that is happening to Swalwell. Ugly, business no matter the “landscape.”
Diana...what you described from higher education...is the EXACT same machinery…just at a different scale.
The label lands. The calculation begins. The allies quietly recalibrate. The institution protects itself first. And...the person at the center...guilty...or not...gets processed by a system designed to manage risk…not find truth.
That's what you watched happen in those hallways.
That's EXACTLY what's happening in Sacramento right now.
The landscape changes. The machinery...doesn't.
What strikes me most...you saw it happen to good people. People who didn't deserve it. That experience gives you something most analysts...just don't have.
I was also a “target!” I taught in the Maricopa Community College District for 25 years. 251,000 students and 10 separate college campuses throughout the Phoenix metro area.
My own sister-in-law participated in the attempts to smear me. Fortunately I had made powerful allies at the Chancellor level and with VPs and a few influential faculty. Those HR management and organizational management courses I took along the way, through three degrees, helped me to become savvy enough to not be naive. So I made sure to earn trust through transparency with my allies. Loyalty earned, not through blackmail or favors granted (that was my sister-in-law’s method).
I was offered an opportunity to transfer to our online college in 2006 to start a Human Development program. My motto with my “false” friends (and relatives) has been not to get even, but to get better. Upon retirement, I was awarded the Faculty Emeritus distinction. The emeritus designation is based upon the value you add to your college and to your profession.
The nomination is typically sent by the Faculty Senate President for approval by the Chancellor and Governing Board. In my case, my college President asked to be the nominee.
Karma held fast - my sister-in-law was given a vote of no confidence by faculty at my previous college (she was the VP of Academics). A no confidence vote triggers an automatic visit by the accreditation body - which can impact a college’s ability to offer degrees and to participate in student loans. In other words, the college is screwed. My sister-in-law decided to retire and I kept on building a new program that had 4000 students when I retired 10 years ago.
There were many other political-based attacks on others - some with merit, many with none. My story, difficult to slug through it, had a positive result, but most of the smear attacks I saw, did not. I witnessed a lot of good people get hurt.
Congratulations on your emeritus designation! My husband received his a couple of years ago and it is a tremendous and hard earned honor. I also know a little about how the people in higher education can behave without honor, although he keeps me shielded from most of the stories because we have to interact with so many others in the system.
Jack is correct, and the structural observation he makes deserves to be stated plainly: campaigns do not require truth to collapse. They require uncertainty, and uncertainty, once introduced into a competitive race at the moment of maximum visibility, behaves exactly as Jack describes — not as a story to be resolved, but as a force that reorganizes every relationship around the candidate. What we are watching is not a trial. It is a political ecosystem responding to perceived risk. The distinction matters because it explains why the facts, whatever they ultimately are, may not be the deciding variable.
The sequence is what historians will study. Rumors existed. Then corroboration. Then a major outlet. Then four women. Then medical records. Then the withdrawal of Pelosi, Schiff, the campaign chair, and the PAC — all within hours. Jack is correct that this is the moment everything changed, and he is correct that the change was not caused by a verdict but by a calculation. The people closest to Swalwell, with the most to gain from defending him and the most to lose from being wrong, chose not to defend him. File that fact. It is the most important data point in the entire story.
I’m one who believes innocent until proven guilty. The timing of these allegations is suspicious. Who has something to gain from bringing him down? It seems like a smear campaign against him in my opinion.
Hence our “un-cancelling” our donations to Swallwell! It does seem extremely convenient as the primary date draws near…I think we are down to 6 weeks away from it.
Why did nothing come out when he ran for POTUS? Why did nothing come out during his last re-election? And if true, why did he not realize these stories would at some point blow up on him? Denial? Hubris?
Lynne...three sharp questions. Each one deserves a straight answer.
Why nothing during the presidential run?
2019 was a crowded field. He dropped out early...September 2019...BEFORE anyone needed to spend real money targeting him.
You don't deploy opposition research on a candidate who's already fading. You save it...for when it can do MAXIMUM damage.
Why nothing during reelection?
His congressional district is SAFE blue. Nobody needed to take him out there. Reelection in a SAFE seat...doesn't require the same level of opposition research investment as a statewide race...worth $200 million in political capital.
Why didn't he see it coming?
This is the most interesting question.
Two possibilities. NOT mutually exclusive.
First...hubris. The belief that power protects you. That the relationships you've built...the allies you have...the narrative you've constructed…insulate you from accountability.
It's the oldest political MISCALCULATION in the book.
Second...he genuinely believes his own denial. That what happened was either consensual...misremembered...or...mischaracterized.
That belief...true or false...produces exactly the behavior we're seeing. Defiance. Anger. Claims of political conspiracy.
The answer to all three questions is the SAME underneath.
Nobody targets you until you're WORTH targeting.
He became worth targeting the moment he LED the governor's race.
Hmmm .. we all do some serious stupid shit. No one is an absolute angel. I can’t vote for billionaire Steyer.. just can’t.. I was really hoping Swallwell would be the one. Fvck it I’m still backing Swallwell. I’ve done some seriously stupid shit in my life. I’m not going to start pointing fingers at anyone else.
Interesting repeating pattern, makes me think of the spurious Swift boat ad used against John Kerry. Great article, I really appreciate your insight and analysis.
Different accusations, similar timings and patterns from my perspective. One spurious, the other I have not decided yet as I lack enough knowledge. You may know much more about this than I do. I did not intend to cause pain. Jack’s article was my first time being exposed to the allegations.
I've already seen an article claiming that a couple of large donors have dropped him. Now I'm waiting to see what happens in the House regarding this. The timing couldn't possibly be worse. Or more destructive. He has been such a powerful voice against Trump corruption and has had great credibility. One of the most prominent and fearless voices.
Sher'...every word of that assessment of his record is accurate.
He has been one of the MOST effective Trump critics in the House. Precise. Fearless. And...with the prosecutorial instincts to back it up. That's not nothing. That's actually RARE.
Which is exactly why he was worth targeting.
You don't deploy this kind of operation against someone...who doesn't matter. You just don't.
You deploy it...against someone who DOES. Someone whose credibility is REAL…whose voice has REACH…whose presence in a governor's chair...would represent a genuine institutional THREAT... to the people currently dismantling California's resistance capacity.
On the donors...yes. The PAC funded by Uber and Stephen Cloobeck...suspended ALL activity this afternoon. That's not a pause. That's a SIGNAL. Donors don't suspend. They wait and see. Suspension means...the math ALREADY changed.
On the House...watch carefully. If colleagues start creating distance…if committee assignments become suddenly complicated…if the institutional support that makes a congressman effective starts quietly eroding…
That's the slow erosion path the article described.
The MOST dangerous one.
Not because it's loud.
Because...it isn't.
His voice against Trump corruption was real...and...it mattered....a hell of a lot.
I no longer know where abuse /intimidation join impropriety / rudeness. I am old enough to have experienced this and witnessed this at times as obnoxiousness du jour. I had high hopes for Stallwell. Is he aware of the specifics? Has he reached out to these accusers? My initial reaction is it’s time for him to say adios to electoral politics but should every guy be snuffed out by allegations? Wouldn’t that be a convenient way to narrow the field? Is that different than women of child-bearing years not getting promotions simply because they may need maternity leave, regardless of whether they are even planning on having children? Any men reading this, what are your thoughts?
I’m a Californian. My first thought when I heard about this was that billionaire Tom Steyer was behind this (the only ads on TV now are Steyer (he’s all over the effing place) & then the 2nd ones were Swalwell followed by Steyer’s attack ads against him. But the more I think about it, I think this came directly from Trump: Swalwell managed Trump’s 2nd impeachment, so there’s revenge, but further this could sully the 2nd impeachment, which would be more important to Trump. IMO.
Well, the timing of this new ad for Steyer is very interesting, since the “big news” broke about Swallwell…Ro Khanna, my Congressional Representative, is now endorsing Steyer. Find the time just a little too coincidental to be comfortable! It just aired on MS Now a few minutes ago!
The timing of this seems very suspicious and almost like someone may be being paid to do this. Of course that is jumping to conclusions and really need to wait and see how many are saying the same thing and if the patterns are similar. This is just the kind of thing like you said jack that his will have a devastating affect on his campaign.
Teri...bingo...you're right to flag the timing…and...right to pump the brakes on the conclusion simultaneously.
Suspicious timing is real in politics. Opposition research is a billion-dollar industry. The fact that this broke 27 days before early voting begins...is not an accident of the calendar.
But...here's the discipline that matters.
Suspicious timing...doesn't make allegations false. And... it doesn't make them true.
Watch the PATTERN. Not the timing.
Timing tells you about strategy.
The PATTERN tells you about truth.
-Jack
Corporate Media is turning into the National Inquire of rumors and propaganda. Eric Swalwell is an amazing Statesman and is, and will continue to be a decent human being. I hope he rises above all this gossip, because he would be an outstanding Governor. Thanks for getting out ahead of this story, Jack. TGIF to you and your readers and will reStack ASAP 💯👍
Karen...thank you for the reStack... genuinely appreciated!
Your frustration...with how allegations move from social media...to national coverage...with minimal vetting is legitimate. That problem is real and documented.
Here's where I'll be clear though.
The San Francisco Chronicle is not the National Enquirer. Their story includes a former staffer...contemporaneous texts...disclosures to friends and family...and medical follow-up. CNN followed with four additional women.
That doesn't make him guilty.
But...it moves this beyond rumor.
What happens next...whether the accounts are consistent...whether corroboration holds ...will tell us FAR more than any initial reporting.
Your faith in him may be entirely warranted.
But...the framework for evaluating it has to be the evidence…not the affection.
Stay with it!
-Jack
Jack, I believe that at the very least, this will destroy his gubernatorial campaign and at worst, his entire political career. I agree with others that the timing is suspect. I have no idea whether he’s guilty or not but I don’t think it matters… not for his career. If he’s innocent, I really hate this for him.
I just have one question for right now. Why didn’t allegations like this and far worse, destroy Trump’s political career? Too many rich and powerful people, institutions and governments involved?
Thank you for your insight into this. I agree with all of it.
#Holdfast
~Susan
The Dems have a habit of holding their candidates to extreme purity tests, especially in this area. Fwiw, I believe it was the impeachment of Pres Clinton that caused the Dems to have such a low tolerance level for these sorts of things. Look at Al Franken. He got pushed out of the Senate because he made inappropriate remarks/touching during his time as a comedian. There are Repubs that see these sorts of things as a badge of honor, and way too many think that intimate violence is a great way to keep their woman/women in line.
You’re right on all counts imho.
I also wonder why allegations did not destroy a particular career when such allegations have destroyed other careers. Timing and patterns are important though. Still, even when allegations have come earlier for someone, why is it that that person continued and was claimed a winner. Was it money? There are many people who refused to believe what was proven.
Money, power… who else was involved and stood to lose everything maybe.
Yes. You are so right, and here we are with what happened.
Susan, I have the same question as to why the same kinds of allegations have not seemed to hinder Trump’s career.
Maybe Jack will spell it out for us. I have ideas but he’s so much better at the analysis.
Minnesotan here. This reminds me so much of what happened to Al Franken. I do understand believing the women. But why is it always about the timing. He has been in office for quite a while. Why is this happening now with not much time before the CA primary. This is how you get rid of good democrats whether it is true or not.
Betsy...the Franken comparison hits this squarely on target.
He was pushed out in 72 hours. Before any investigation. Before the Ethics Committee he specifically requested could examine a single piece of evidence.
Whether that was right is still debated. What's not debatable is the result...a senior Democrat...with real institutional power…GONE in three days.
Your timing instinct is sound. Opposition research does NOT surface randomly. Twenty-seven days before early voting...in a wide-open primary...is NOT a coincidence.
But...here's the tension...that doesn't resolve cleanly.
The mechanism can be real…and the allegations can ALSO be real. Timing as a weapon doesn't require fabrication. It just requires PATIENCE.
Speed...and truth...are not the same thing.
-Jack
This is nothing like franken
Exactly, Betsy. Al Franken definitely came to my mind.
Still, there are women I believe should have been believed, yet appointments were approved for the accused people. One of them in particular on the Supreme Court comes to mind.
We have been longtime sustaining donors to Eric Swallwell, though he is not our Congressional Representative. We’ve been impressed by his willingness to stand up and fight, to speak out and are now SHOCKED by these accusations! The article in the San Francisco Chronicle was gutting. Thought that Swallwell was the best chance to elect a Governor akin to the “retiring” Gavin Newsom, who would stand up to this regime, to fight for and protect California. I hate to admit it but we’ve stopped that recurring donation this afternoon, changing it to Xavier Becerra instead. I will not support Steyer, who I do not feel is trustworthy, considering how he’s invested his money over the years. Porter also appears to be someone not worthy of our support. I am so shocked, angry, frustrated…and the timing for this “revelation” also seems very suspicious and convenient…Steyer possibly being the biggest beneficiary of Swallwell’s political “demise!”
PS. While writing this, and consulting my husband, we have decided to “un-cancel” our Swallwell donation, along with donating to Becerra! So glad that you’ve addressed this Jack…let’s hope it’s dirty politics, not what it currently appears to be!
Christie...the back-and-forth you just described...cancel, reconsider, restore...is exactly what this moment does to good people...who care deeply.
That's not weakness. That's conscience...wrestling with uncertainty.
Landing on "support both until we know more" rather than simply walking away...tells me everything about where your values sit.
On Steyer as the primary beneficiary...you're reading the political geometry correctly. In a wide-open race...momentum is EVERYTHING.
Swalwell's stall...is someone else's opening. Watch who moves fastest to fill that space.
On Becerra...credible choice. Institutional depth. A track record stress-tested under real pressure.
Here's what I'll leave you with.
You didn't abandon someone the moment things got complicated. You paused. You thought. You talked it through. And...you made a considered decision.
That's EXACTLY the civic engagement this moment demands.
Stay clear. Stay generous with people who earn it!
-Jack
If there’s a way to direct message me on this platform, could you tell me why you think Katie Porter is “unworthy?” She was my representative. Bear in mind, women are judged far more harshly & for less than men on our politics. I asked for a direct message because I don’t want to take up space here for a personal issue.
I don’t know if there is away to DM, so I am responding here. I liked Porter initially, but as time passed I was reading a number of things that made me uncomfortable with her. That’s about as deep as I am going to go, it’s my personal assessment of this candidate and nothing more.
I CALL HOGWASH!!!
Trump endorses former Fox News host and strong Trump supporter Steve Hilton on Monday, and then this smear story about one of Hilton's opponents breaks on Friday - less than two months before the June 2 Primary. Really?
I'm sure the fact that Trump is seeking revenge on all his perceived enemies, and the fact that Swalwell was the Ranking Member of the House Judiciary Select Subcommittee on the January 6 investigation, had absolutely nothing to do with this.
Sorry. I don't buy any of it.
Mary Jo...you just added a data point the article didn't have.
Trump endorsed Steve Hilton on Monday.
This story broke on Friday.
That's a four-day window between a Trump endorsement of Swalwell's direct competitor…and...the publication of allegations...that immediately destabilized Swalwell's campaign.
That sequence deserves to be stated plainly...and watched CAREFULLY.
Add the January 6 dimension. Swalwell wasn't just a Trump critic...he was a ranking member on the subcommittee....that investigated the INSURRECTION.
Trump has been EXPLICIT..and PUBLIC....about his intention to settle those scores.
The DOJ under Blanche is already pursuing perceived enemies. The FBI under Kash Patel ...was reportedly pushing to release Ethics Committee files on Swalwell...earlier this year.
That's not paranoia. That's a documented PATTERN of behavior...from people who have stated their intentions openly.
Does that make the allegations false?
Not necessarily.
Does it mean the timing and the sequencing deserve serious scrutiny?
ABSOLUTELY.
The San Francisco Chronicle did not manufacture accusers. But...who surfaces information…when…and...to whom…is a separate question from whether the information is true.
Both questions deserve answers.
You're right to demand them!
-Jack
I hadn’t heard of Trump’s endorsement of Hilton…but the longer I think about it, the more likely it seems to me that this is spurious! Wouldn’t discount Trump doing exactly what you suggest…he’s a vindictive and looking to hurt everyone…his “revenge & retribution tour” is what I have been referring to Trump 2.0 as….
I agree with Mary Jo’s assessment. The timing is very suspect. How long ago did these allegations occur? I wouldn’t put it past Trump to throw a wrench into this election. Anything to get his pick, Hilton, into the office. Trump complains about election rigging and does it anyways.
Sidebar: by Trump choosing Hilton could be considered by some to be a jinx vote (since the majority of Trump’s choices have lost) and may cause Bianco to get the votes instead on the GOPs side. I’m hoping cooler heads will prevail and neither Hilton or Bianco gets past the primary.
rinse and repeat.
this is how "they" sabotage (reference what they did to Biden).
trying to discredit another candidate to pressure them to drop out.
wonder why people with good intentions to make a difference do not run for office???
Rod...because this is exactly what happens to them.
The machinery doesn't care about good intentions. It cares about threat level. The more viable you are…the more valuable you are...as a TARGET.
Biden is the right reference point, Rod. The drip…drip…drip of the competency narrative.
Each story individually defensible. The cumulative weight…DEVASTATING.
Same structure. Different WEAPON.
Your final question...should keep every voter up at night.
We are systematically pricing good people out of public service. The cost-benefit calculation...increasingly doesn't pencil out for anyone with something real to lose.
Which means...the people most willing to run…are increasingly the people who want power badly enough...to absorb ANY cost...to get it.
That never produces good government.
-Jack
A story as old as time itself.
True words, Jack. I saw this pattern happen, all too often, in higher education-a system that exists on politics. Good people got hurt, their families struggled to stay together, “sides” were taken and “pecking” orders were restructured. People were forced out when they were “labeled” in the same way that is happening to Swalwell. Ugly, business no matter the “landscape.”
Diana...what you described from higher education...is the EXACT same machinery…just at a different scale.
The label lands. The calculation begins. The allies quietly recalibrate. The institution protects itself first. And...the person at the center...guilty...or not...gets processed by a system designed to manage risk…not find truth.
That's what you watched happen in those hallways.
That's EXACTLY what's happening in Sacramento right now.
The landscape changes. The machinery...doesn't.
What strikes me most...you saw it happen to good people. People who didn't deserve it. That experience gives you something most analysts...just don't have.
You know what it looks like....from the INSIDE.
Carry that into how you read this story!
-Jack
I was also a “target!” I taught in the Maricopa Community College District for 25 years. 251,000 students and 10 separate college campuses throughout the Phoenix metro area.
My own sister-in-law participated in the attempts to smear me. Fortunately I had made powerful allies at the Chancellor level and with VPs and a few influential faculty. Those HR management and organizational management courses I took along the way, through three degrees, helped me to become savvy enough to not be naive. So I made sure to earn trust through transparency with my allies. Loyalty earned, not through blackmail or favors granted (that was my sister-in-law’s method).
I was offered an opportunity to transfer to our online college in 2006 to start a Human Development program. My motto with my “false” friends (and relatives) has been not to get even, but to get better. Upon retirement, I was awarded the Faculty Emeritus distinction. The emeritus designation is based upon the value you add to your college and to your profession.
The nomination is typically sent by the Faculty Senate President for approval by the Chancellor and Governing Board. In my case, my college President asked to be the nominee.
Karma held fast - my sister-in-law was given a vote of no confidence by faculty at my previous college (she was the VP of Academics). A no confidence vote triggers an automatic visit by the accreditation body - which can impact a college’s ability to offer degrees and to participate in student loans. In other words, the college is screwed. My sister-in-law decided to retire and I kept on building a new program that had 4000 students when I retired 10 years ago.
There were many other political-based attacks on others - some with merit, many with none. My story, difficult to slug through it, had a positive result, but most of the smear attacks I saw, did not. I witnessed a lot of good people get hurt.
Congratulations on your emeritus designation! My husband received his a couple of years ago and it is a tremendous and hard earned honor. I also know a little about how the people in higher education can behave without honor, although he keeps me shielded from most of the stories because we have to interact with so many others in the system.
Jack is correct, and the structural observation he makes deserves to be stated plainly: campaigns do not require truth to collapse. They require uncertainty, and uncertainty, once introduced into a competitive race at the moment of maximum visibility, behaves exactly as Jack describes — not as a story to be resolved, but as a force that reorganizes every relationship around the candidate. What we are watching is not a trial. It is a political ecosystem responding to perceived risk. The distinction matters because it explains why the facts, whatever they ultimately are, may not be the deciding variable.
The sequence is what historians will study. Rumors existed. Then corroboration. Then a major outlet. Then four women. Then medical records. Then the withdrawal of Pelosi, Schiff, the campaign chair, and the PAC — all within hours. Jack is correct that this is the moment everything changed, and he is correct that the change was not caused by a verdict but by a calculation. The people closest to Swalwell, with the most to gain from defending him and the most to lose from being wrong, chose not to defend him. File that fact. It is the most important data point in the entire story.
#HOLDFAST
I’m one who believes innocent until proven guilty. The timing of these allegations is suspicious. Who has something to gain from bringing him down? It seems like a smear campaign against him in my opinion.
Hence our “un-cancelling” our donations to Swallwell! It does seem extremely convenient as the primary date draws near…I think we are down to 6 weeks away from it.
I am hardcore defense oriented. This is not where we should be focused. We need to seat a governor, preferably porter.
Why did nothing come out when he ran for POTUS? Why did nothing come out during his last re-election? And if true, why did he not realize these stories would at some point blow up on him? Denial? Hubris?
Great questions
Lynne...three sharp questions. Each one deserves a straight answer.
Why nothing during the presidential run?
2019 was a crowded field. He dropped out early...September 2019...BEFORE anyone needed to spend real money targeting him.
You don't deploy opposition research on a candidate who's already fading. You save it...for when it can do MAXIMUM damage.
Why nothing during reelection?
His congressional district is SAFE blue. Nobody needed to take him out there. Reelection in a SAFE seat...doesn't require the same level of opposition research investment as a statewide race...worth $200 million in political capital.
Why didn't he see it coming?
This is the most interesting question.
Two possibilities. NOT mutually exclusive.
First...hubris. The belief that power protects you. That the relationships you've built...the allies you have...the narrative you've constructed…insulate you from accountability.
It's the oldest political MISCALCULATION in the book.
Second...he genuinely believes his own denial. That what happened was either consensual...misremembered...or...mischaracterized.
That belief...true or false...produces exactly the behavior we're seeing. Defiance. Anger. Claims of political conspiracy.
The answer to all three questions is the SAME underneath.
Nobody targets you until you're WORTH targeting.
He became worth targeting the moment he LED the governor's race.
That...is when the clock started.
-Jack
Hmmm .. we all do some serious stupid shit. No one is an absolute angel. I can’t vote for billionaire Steyer.. just can’t.. I was really hoping Swallwell would be the one. Fvck it I’m still backing Swallwell. I’ve done some seriously stupid shit in my life. I’m not going to start pointing fingers at anyone else.
Anyone know about Villarigosa? I think I slaughtered the spelling of his name..
Check Xavier Becerra…he’s the real deal! Villaraigosa is the former Mayor of Los Angeles…I’m not comfortable with him…seems a little too slick to me!
Interesting repeating pattern, makes me think of the spurious Swift boat ad used against John Kerry. Great article, I really appreciate your insight and analysis.
This is not like kerry
Different accusations, similar timings and patterns from my perspective. One spurious, the other I have not decided yet as I lack enough knowledge. You may know much more about this than I do. I did not intend to cause pain. Jack’s article was my first time being exposed to the allegations.
I've already seen an article claiming that a couple of large donors have dropped him. Now I'm waiting to see what happens in the House regarding this. The timing couldn't possibly be worse. Or more destructive. He has been such a powerful voice against Trump corruption and has had great credibility. One of the most prominent and fearless voices.
Sher'...every word of that assessment of his record is accurate.
He has been one of the MOST effective Trump critics in the House. Precise. Fearless. And...with the prosecutorial instincts to back it up. That's not nothing. That's actually RARE.
Which is exactly why he was worth targeting.
You don't deploy this kind of operation against someone...who doesn't matter. You just don't.
You deploy it...against someone who DOES. Someone whose credibility is REAL…whose voice has REACH…whose presence in a governor's chair...would represent a genuine institutional THREAT... to the people currently dismantling California's resistance capacity.
On the donors...yes. The PAC funded by Uber and Stephen Cloobeck...suspended ALL activity this afternoon. That's not a pause. That's a SIGNAL. Donors don't suspend. They wait and see. Suspension means...the math ALREADY changed.
On the House...watch carefully. If colleagues start creating distance…if committee assignments become suddenly complicated…if the institutional support that makes a congressman effective starts quietly eroding…
That's the slow erosion path the article described.
The MOST dangerous one.
Not because it's loud.
Because...it isn't.
His voice against Trump corruption was real...and...it mattered....a hell of a lot.
Whether it survives this…
Is the question nobody can answer...yet.
-Jack
I no longer know where abuse /intimidation join impropriety / rudeness. I am old enough to have experienced this and witnessed this at times as obnoxiousness du jour. I had high hopes for Stallwell. Is he aware of the specifics? Has he reached out to these accusers? My initial reaction is it’s time for him to say adios to electoral politics but should every guy be snuffed out by allegations? Wouldn’t that be a convenient way to narrow the field? Is that different than women of child-bearing years not getting promotions simply because they may need maternity leave, regardless of whether they are even planning on having children? Any men reading this, what are your thoughts?
I’m a Californian. My first thought when I heard about this was that billionaire Tom Steyer was behind this (the only ads on TV now are Steyer (he’s all over the effing place) & then the 2nd ones were Swalwell followed by Steyer’s attack ads against him. But the more I think about it, I think this came directly from Trump: Swalwell managed Trump’s 2nd impeachment, so there’s revenge, but further this could sully the 2nd impeachment, which would be more important to Trump. IMO.
Well, the timing of this new ad for Steyer is very interesting, since the “big news” broke about Swallwell…Ro Khanna, my Congressional Representative, is now endorsing Steyer. Find the time just a little too coincidental to be comfortable! It just aired on MS Now a few minutes ago!
Ask Jasmine Crocket about how the Dems eat their own.
Yup…and she’s who we were supporting for the Senate!
I love her. But she was too good, too loud, too much a woman for them. It’s shameful
Exactly…she’s a sassy woman and doesn’t suffer fools, unfortunately a lot of people, especially in that state, cannot handled that!